dart_company_overview

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Fetch' implies a read-only operation, but nothing is disclosed about authentication requirements, rate limits, failure behavior, or the structure/shape of the returned raw data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no filler. However, it is somewhat under-specified rather than efficiently complete, so it earns high but not full marks.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the returned data looks like or how the raw data relates to sibling tools. It does neither, leaving the agent without enough context to confidently use the tool beyond making a trivial call.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the corp_code parameter beyond what the schema's name and regex pattern already imply. Since the description must compensate for the low coverage but does not, it falls below the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and a clear resource ('raw OpenDART company registration data'). It is distinguishable from siblings like dart_financial_statements and dart_disclosures, though the word 'raw' is somewhat vague and could mislead about what form the data takes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as resolve_dart_company or dart_disclosures. The description does not mention prerequisites like how to obtain a corp_code, nor does it exclude cases where another sibling would be more appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.